Is it possible to prove that a good God exists?

[empther]

Quote:
Originally Posted by bzkoss236 View Post
He’s asking for an answer on a Christian forum. This is how Christians define ‘good’. How do you define ‘good’? What makes something ‘good’?

If you don’t understand that “goodness” does not allow indiscriminate drowning of people and animals, then I will not waste time on trying to explain.

Ignores any consideration that:

1. the story of the Flood is not literal but points out that all men are appointed to die and that the good, Moses and his family, will go on living in the next world.
2. to be persons, human beings must have free choice, and sometimes men choose to do evil
3. that God allows the universe to act contingently, that is, in an undetermined way, otherwise human beings would not have free choices about what to do with the world and therefore personhood would mean very little if anything
4. many other things ignored if I wanted to sit here all day pondering, but you get the idea

Only by ignoring points already made many times on these forums can the skeptics get away with statements as in the above quote.

 

[bzkoss236]

If you don’t understand that “goodness” does not allow indiscriminate drowning of people and animals, then I will not waste time on trying to explain.

You seem to be claiming common sense, but that does not answer my question. Where does the standard of what is good come from in your opinion? What makes drowning people or animals not good in your opinion? I have my own explanations for why they are wrong, but you have yet to give me your explanation for why they are wrong.

 

[Linux]

If you admit to experiencing right and wrong, good and evil as truly reflective of an objective standard (this is to say that some behaviors are truly and always right or wrong regardless of personal subjective opinion), then one can prove that this standard must exist in that which does not begin to exist and is the very act of existence in which we participate.

Anything that is contingent and thus finite in its existence cannot be the existential objective standard by which something is always true. An Objective Eternal standard of truth can only be found in that which is Eternal.

You can reason that this being is Love itself, for if it is not identical to love itself it cannot be the objective standard by which a thing is right or wrong (A thing is wrong insomuch as it is a selfish act which is the opposite of love).

From this you can continue to argue that this objective standard of right and wrong is absolutely perfect love, for only perfection can be an objective standard for right and wrong.

Goodness is Love or an expression of love. So you can also argue that this being is personal insofar as the fact that love cannot meaningfully be identical to that which is impersonal

You can then prove that God is more than one person by arguing the following…

1. God’s nature is love.
2. Love by its very nature is shared.
3. God is the only necessary being or nature. Thus God is not compelled to share with that which does not exist and neither can it be said that God is dependent on creation in order to be love (creation occurs because God already and eternally is love). Love is shared among existent beings.
4. Love is not impersonal, but is instead something shared among persons.
5. That which does not share love cannot be love, for that would be selfish.
6. If God is only one person he cannot share his love and thus cannot be love itself because love by definition is shared among persons. It is an activity and thus where sharing is not love is not.

Conclusion: Therefore God is one nature, which is love, but also at the same time the love of God as eternally expressed is also a community of persons for love can only exist in the activity of communal sharing.

In a sense God is the first family or community.

 

[Bagheera]

You seem to be claiming common sense, but that does not answer my question. Where does the standard of what is good come from in your opinion?

From biology.

What makes drowning people or animals not good in your opinion? I have my own explanations for why they are wrong, but you have yet to give me your explanation for why they are wrong.

I am not interested in arguing with you. Just perform this simple experiment: “Announce that you will drown a few kittens, puppies and some children at a certain place and at a certain time”. Make a video about yourself doing this deed. Then put the video up on YouTube, with a proclamation that your act was performed out of “goodness”, “love” and “caring”… don’t forget to include your picture, your name and your address… and then observe the result. You will find it out in a few minutes if your concept of “goodness” is shared by the everyday people. Of course we shall miss your posts… for the obvious reason.

 

[bzkoss236]

From biology.

How so? What about biology causes morality?

I am not interested in arguing with you. Just perform this simple experiment: “Announce that you will drown a few kittens, puppies and some children at a certain place and at a certain time”. Make a video about yourself doing this deed. Then put the video up on YouTube, with a proclamation that your act was performed out of “goodness”, “love” and “caring”… don’t forget to include your picture, your name and your address… and then observe the result. You will find it out in a few minutes if your concept of “goodness” is shared by the everyday people. Of course we shall miss your posts… for the obvious reason.

I know what the reactions will be, and I know about the existence of good and evil, my question is about where it comes from. What causes something to be considered good or evil? Yes, there are many things that are shared among people in terms of morality, but you have failed to prove where it comes from. The fact that people find it wrong does not make it wrong. People find it wrong because it is wrong. So, what makes it wrong?

 

[Hypnotoad]

How so? What about biology causes morality?

I know what the reactions will be, and I know about the existence of good and evil, my question is about where it comes from. What causes something to be considered good or evil? Yes, there are many things that are shared among people in terms of morality, but you have failed to prove where it comes from. The fact that people find it wrong does not make it wrong. People find it wrong because it is wrong. So, what makes it wrong?

I wonder if he/she understands yet that they will not be able to answer this question without the belief in a God.

 

[bzkoss236]

I wonder if he/she understands yet that they will not be able to answer this question without the belief in a God.

Yes, he/she may be jumping around the question.

 

[Bahman]

I took the question to mean: given that God exists, can we prove he is good? The O.P. is frequently vague in what he is saying . It would be a help to know just what the question really is.

But to answer your question. Yes we can know with certitude that God exists. The universe exists. It could not have created itself, it could not be responsible for its own existence. I did not make myself, you did not make yourself, nothing in the universe does. Therefore, there is an ultimate cause for the existence of the universe which is not caused itself. And this Being must have all the characteristics we attribute to God. ( please don’t ask me to prove each one becuase then I will simply refer you the the entire Corpus of Thomas Aquinas.).

From the fact that such a Being exists we can determine that He is Good by the effects He has created. His effects are good first in that they exist and in so far as they follow the plan of their nature, in so far as they fulfill the proper functions of their natures. They are good, in addition, because all the creatures in the universe work for the benefit of all the others, and especially of man. We could go on with this line of thinking but there is no need to elaborate the point.

Finally, it is reasonable to assume that such a Good Creator would not leave us in ignorance as to His identity, nor to explain to us why he created us. It is reasonable to assume that he would Reveal Himself to us and tell us Who He is and what he means by His creation. And He has done that. First He revealed Himself through his works, then Verbally to the Children of Israel, to Abraham, the other Patriarchs, the Prophets and finally through His Son and then through His Church and the Holy Spirit. We are not alone!!! We have a personal and loving God, a Father Who loves us and has laid out His desires and plans.

Linus2nd

Lets assume that God exist as I personally don’t have any problem with this assumption. The assumption that God is good however contradict our current metaphysical state that you can find both evil and good in it. Moreover the fact that God sent some prophet to guide us to do good does prove that God is intrinsically good.

Lets imagine for a second that God is evil and prefer devil over good. This God could fool some individuals by sending some fake messages that it/he/she (God) prefer good over bad. Those who obey blindly eventually get punished. The purpose to fool some individuals and punish them is an evil act and could only be done through fooling them which in fact is evil action as well so there is no problem anywhere.

 

[Linusthe2nd]

Lets assume that God exist as I personally don’t have any problem with this assumption. The assumption that God is good however contradict our current metaphysical state that you can find both evil and good in it. Moreover the fact that God sent some prophet to guide us to do good does prove that God is intrinsically good.

Lets imagine for a second that God is evil and prefer devil over good. This God could fool some individuals by sending some fake messages that it/he/she (God) prefer good over bad. Those who obey blindly eventually get punished. The purpose to fool some individuals and punish them is an evil act and could only be done through fooling them which in fact is evil action as well so there is no problem anywhere.

Evil is not a positive thing, it is the absence of a good that should be there. God is good because all that he created is good. All evil is the failure of people to recogize their true good. They all desire the good, but many mistake the object which will provide that good. But God has promised to bring good out of evil.

Linus2nd

 

[empther]

Lets imagine for a second that God is evil and prefer devil over good. This God could fool some individuals by sending some fake messages that it/he/she (God) prefer good over bad. Those who obey blindly eventually get punished. The purpose to fool some individuals and punish them is an evil act and could only be done through fooling them which in fact is evil action as well so there is no problem anywhere.

This is kind of like a blue whale doing magic tricks to fool a bacteria colony in a petri dish.
Why would he bother? What does he get out of it? It makes no sense at all.

Also,
it seems than an evil God would be creating good people. But this is impossible. As Aquinas says in ST Q 6
newadvent.org/summa/1006.htm#article1

For a thing is good according to its desirableness. Now everything seeks after its own perfection; and the perfection and form of an effect consist in a certain likeness to the agent, since every agent makes its like; and hence the agent itself is desirable and has the nature of good. For the very thing which is desirable in it is the participation of its likeness. Therefore, since God is the first effective cause of all things, it is manifest that the aspect of good and of desirableness belong to Him;

Restated in simple terms, a caused thing must resemble its cause. An acorn must have something in common with the oak tree ( in this case, DNA ).
Since good is constructive and evil is destructive, from whence does the good in good man come if not from God? But this is impossible if God is evil. The human soul is spiritual. Its action depends on God’s intervention from instant to instant. So an evil God would not and could not intervene to help the soul be good.

 

[sealoch]

This is kind of like a blue whale doing magic tricks to fool a bacteria colony in a petri dish.
Why would he bother? What does he get out of it? It makes no sense at all.

That could be used either way. Why would he create us knowing everything would get messed up and he’d have to sacrifice son/self.

 

[bzkoss236]

That could be used either way. Why would he create us knowing everything would get messed up and he’d have to sacrifice son/self.

Because he wants us to love him. And real love can only happen when there is a choice between him and something/one else. Since there is that choice, there are bound to be people who do not choose to love him.

 

[sealoch]

Because he wants us to love him. And real love can only happen when there is a choice between him and something/one else. Since there is that choice, there are bound to be people who do not choose to love him.

This is exactly why i will not believe I believe that it is immoral to create something and then demand worship.

 

[polytropos]

This is exactly why i will not believe I believe that it is immoral to create something and then demand worship.

God does not demand worship. The intellect is directed towards knowing truth, and the will proceeds from the intellect, so if God created us and God is the ultimate truth, then it is rightful for us to worship as a consequence of what we are as intellectual human beings. It has nothing to do with divine fiat. (Although God has reminded us about what is right and just.)

God also has no moral obligations, so it does not make sense to speak of him being “moral” or “immoral.” There is nothing God “ought” to do.

 

[sealoch]

God does not demand worship. The intellect is directed towards knowing truth, and the will proceeds from the intellect, so if God created us and God is the ultimate truth, then it is rightful for us to worship as a consequence of what we are as intellectual human beings. It has nothing to do with divine fiat. (Although God has reminded us about what is right and just.)

God also has no moral obligations, so it does not make sense to speak of him being “moral” or “immoral.” There is nothing God “ought” to do.

Of course he demands worship if you don’t you are supposedly condemned to hell that is a threat.
A good god would not make it so unsubstantial if this were the case such a condemnation would justly such a demand of evidence.

 

[Boulder257]

Of course he demands worship if you don’t you are supposedly condemned to hell that is a threat.
A good god would not make it so unsubstantial if this were the case such a condemnation would justly such a demand of evidence.

So you believe in God, you just don’t accept the Catholic definition of Him? I’m still trying to understand your position since it seems to be all over the place.

 

[polytropos]

Of course he demands worship if you don’t you are supposedly condemned to hell that is a threat.

That is a warning, not a threat. The human soul is eternal. If the intellect and will succumb to sin, then it is a matter of metaphysical necessity that the soul cannot spend eternity with God, who is perfect.

 

[sealoch]

So you believe in God, you just don’t accept the Catholic definition of Him? I’m still trying to understand your position since it seems to be all over the place.

I am unsure how it could be all over but that is easily corrected.

I do not believe that their is a personal loving god. And if a god does exist it does not care what happens and does not intervene.

I am relieved in fact that it is so unlikely that a god does exist.

 

[bzkoss236]

Of course he demands worship if you don’t you are supposedly condemned to hell that is a threat.
A good god would not make it so unsubstantial if this were the case such a condemnation would justly such a demand of evidence.

I think you misunderstand what hell is. You seem to think that God sends people to hell when they don’t worship him because he’s a whiny child who wants his way. This isn’t the case.

Hell is a natural consequence, a state of agony, when you separate yourself from that which is good. If you take away good, you are left with the bad. This isn’t God’s intention, this is just what happens. God doesn’t send us to hell, we send ourselves.

If you choose not to go to work for an entire week without notifying your boss and without reason, you will be fired. That is a natural consequence.

If you choose never to go to class or study for your exams and never learn the material, you will fail the course. That is the natural consequence for your actions.

If you choose to separate yourself from goodness, you are left only with that which is not good, this is hell.

God isn’t the child with the magnifying glass that many atheists make him out to be. He is a parent that wants the best for his rebellious children.

 

[Boulder257]

I am unsure how it could be all over but that is easily corrected.

I do not believe that their is a personal loving god. And if a god does exist it does not care what happens and does not intervene.

I am relieved in fact that it is so unlikely that a god does exist.

I am always intrigued by why someone with your system of belief chooses to join and be active in a religious, and in this case, Catholic forum. Out of true curiosity, why did you join and what do you hope to accomplish?